Live data from Hacker News

Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

sec.gov

301–310 of 1001 posts

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#302
post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's another belief floated by Josh Wolfe (an investor with Lux Capital) who claimed it was a ruse to liquidate Tesla stock en masse without Tesla hodlers getting suspicious and tanking the inflated stock price. https://twitter.com/wolfejosh/status/1545387947578597376

The deal includes a "specific performance" clause, which allows Twitter to force Musk to carry out the deal. He can't simply pay $1 billion and walk away, he's in for a very messy legal fight. This pretext about bots is incredibly weak and he's in no way guaranteed to win. If this really were part of some grand master plan, I think he would have left himself an easier out.

Never underestimate the incompetence of the average human. Doubly so if they are rich and powerful. In fact if a master plan has several fatal flaws on closer inspection, then that’s just evidence that the perpetrator just didn’t think it all through before executing.

If you watch an amateur chess game you’ll find that most players actually have some master plan, but don’t have the skills to see the flaws, or even if the plan is perfect, they don’t have the skills to play it through either.

My sniff test for any conspiracy theory actually involves incompetence. The more competent the plan and execution need to be, the less likely it is to be a conspiracy.

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#303
I have very little context here. It seems the general sentiment in the comments is that this attempt to get out of the merger agreement will fail and that Musk will be forced to follow through with the purchase of Twitter. At the current rate Twitter is trading at, Musk will be paying roughly 50% over market value to acquire the company.

So a question: if you believe Musk will still purchase Twitter at an inflated price, are there any good reasons for not purchasing Twitter stock? In other words, Musk has offered to give you $54.20 per share, and you can purchase those shares for $36.81 at the time of this comment. If folks are confident that this trade will go through, isn't it a quick way (relative to 8% YoY) to 1.5x your investment?

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#304

Why would he spend $44B on a company worth $28B today? I’d make a new offer of $35B. They’d probably accept.

Because he signed a contract to that effect, without any contingencies if the stock went down. He doesn’t really have a choice except to go through an extended legal process that likely will end up going against him.

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#305
post #278

It seems apparent to this observer that he developed cold feet pretty fast after an impetuous decision, and has been looking for any reason to back out of it since then. The spam accounts angle seems like a convenient scapegoat, rather than a real surprise to him. He's clearly eccentric in his approach to decision making: I don't think any Harvard Business School course will teach "the Musk Principles". But it's uncl…

This is such a terrible look for Elon. I’ve really liked him up until now but this just feels like playing with our emotions. Honestly starting to question how much hope there is for mars to happen at all.

>Honestly starting to question how much hope there is for mars to happen at all.

i spat out my drink reading this

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#306
post #291
post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The deal includes a "specific performance" clause, which allows Twitter to force Musk to carry out the deal. He can't simply pay $1 billion and walk away, he's in for a very messy legal fight. This pretext about bots is incredibly weak and he's in no way guaranteed to win. If this really were part of some grand master plan, I think he would have left himself an easier out.

It also depends on what the Twitter board and shareholders want. Will they want to get bought out and owned by someone who clearly doesn't want to own the company, and may run it into the ground out of spite? Certainly some shareholders will just want to take the money and run (the agreed-upon buyout price is quite a premium over the current stock price), but others will be more interested in protecting the future of…

He's constantly dragged the company and founders through the mud and the stock dropped 7% once he called the deal off.

I'd sued and settle for a few billion instead of taking the one billion backout

He uses his wealth as a weapon against companies he doesn't like, just the mere threat he may get involved causes massive changes in the stock price and in turn causes investors to suffer financial lose.

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's another belief floated by Josh Wolfe (an investor with Lux Capital) who claimed it was a ruse to liquidate Tesla stock en masse without Tesla hodlers getting suspicious and tanking the inflated stock price. https://twitter.com/wolfejosh/status/1545387947578597376

More than one financial analysit/money manager has floated this idea in our circle. It seems reasonalble; an pointing to the last time he sold a bunch (11B?) and told everyone it was to pay his taxes. They seem to think it was to just convert some high-risk (TSLA) to low risk (Cash, etc).

That sounds reasonably logical, but by what measure of logic is overpaying for Twitter, of all assets, a good deal? There are surely better companies to do this sort of thing with, and end up with an actually valuable asset at the end of it.

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Musk has released nothing that would indicate that the numbers are fraudulent.

Read the SEC filing?

I read it, it contains no data, none. But I think you know that and are purposely deflecting.

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#310

The filed letter ( https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/000110465922... ) isn't the knockdown argument I would be expecting. Musk is saying, you haven't demonstrated your numbers are accurate. But having signed the merger agreement and waived due diligence, I think he needs to demonstrate that they are _not_ accurate. Complaining Twitter rate-limited his API access (which would be very foolish on their par…

Right- he waived diligence. Twitter has no obligation to prove anything to him. Twitter is obligated to give him documents if they are reasonable to request and helpful for him in financial planning. If the documents Twitter has on hand are flawed or not comprehensive, that doesn't give a pretext to leave the deal. I am sure his lawyers know this and it will all be negotiated.
Post reply on HN